Appeals to strike out suppliers’ defence in commercial contract dispute dismissed as discovery errors not fatal and factual disputes require trial

The Court of Appeal dismissed two appeals by the plaintiff, who had acted as a litigant in person, seeking to strike out the defence of two supplier companies in long-running commercial litigation relating to the alleged failure to supply suitable thermoplastic edgebands for the plaintiff's manufacturing business. The appeals challenged previous High Court refusals to strike out the defences on the grounds of alleged inadequate discovery and claims that the defence was frivolous, vexatious, or bound to fail. The Court of Appeal affirmed that the High Court had correctly identified the legal principles: the failures in discovery were not sufficiently culpable to warrant striking out the defence, nor was there evidence of prejudice threatening a fair trial. The plaintiff's attempts to rely on selective business correspondence to summarily resolve factual disputes or to establish an incontrovertible breach of contract were rejected, as the relevant documents required full factual context and a trial. The decisions of both High Court judges were upheld, and the suppliers’ defence stands. The Court noted several procedural and discovery errors by the supplier companies' legal representatives but found them ultimately addressed or immaterial to the fairness of the process.